Setting off alarms

[UKBoB]

Im really enjoying the cerb, Ive set off more alarms in the first few days than I did in 6 months of V8S ownership.

Equally, more pops in a good 30 second run than all 6 months running the last Tiv.

pop pop bang! wooooo wooooo wooooo
But f hell, the fuel economy is BAD!! Far far worse than the 4.0 RV8, Im sure someone will be along with a reason...?

[Extra 300 Driver]

A reason?

Think you have covered it, all those pops and bangs. Is your car a de-cat? I know that when I took the cats off the MPG went through the floor, but the grins/mile went sky high!

What MPG are you getting?

As for car alarms, multi-story car parks are the best place, and better still if your car gives a loving 'BANG' on start up!

>> Edited by Extra 300 Driver on Thursday 27th January 14:03

[UKBoB]

Extra 300 Driver said:

A reason? Think you have covered it, all those pops and bangs. Is your car a de-cat? I know that when I took the cats off the MPG went through the floor, but the grins/mile went sky high! What MPG are you getting? As for car alarms, multi-story car parks are the best place, and better still if your car gives a loving 'BANG' on start up! >> Edited by Extra 300 Driver on Thursday 27th January 14:03

Hmm, I meant is there a reason why a 4.5 engine uses SOO much more fuel than a 4.0. I dont know how much petrol Ive used, but Ive use one hell of a lot more than I did with the Rover V8. Masses more

Equally, I had no idea the removal of cats would increase fuel consumption, as they are on the tailpipe side of the combustion chamber

[Podie]

Er… cos the pops and bangs are unburnt fuel... ?



Edited cos me speeelin wus roobish. Shaddup!


>> Edited by Podie on Thursday 27th January 15:25

[UKBoB]

Podie said:

Er… cos the pops and bangs are unburnt fuel... ? Edited cos me speeelin wus roobish. Shaddup! >> Edited by Podie on Thursday 27th January 15:25

Yep, understand what the poops and bhangs are, but the cats are the tailpipe side of the engine, thus shouldnt affect fuel flow into the engine in the slightest.

At least thats how I was thinking, until someone enlightened me just now, and improving induction with the removal of cats, which makes more sense

[redleicester]

I can't comment on whether the 4.5 drinks more fuel than the 4.2, but it certainly is far more than the RV8 I had in my old Chim.

Postulating, it's possible that as the 4.2 has a better spread of torque - far more low down, you don't have to rag the pants off it to extract *every day* performance. Hence why the 4.2s seem to suit better as daily drivers, as they're less stressful - you don't have to wind the beggar up to nip into traffic. That would also logically lead to lower fuel consumption.

I'm averaging about 19mpg at the mo, in mixed driving, more townie than cruising, with a 20 mile back road blast to get home... (and I don't spare the horses Jeeves )

[jasonben]

I set two car alarms off every morning coming up the road right by my works!

Even better, is the mailbox underground car park, i can usually guarantee at least 6 to 10 on a good drive around the car park!!

Decatted 4.5's with sports boxes are the dogs chocolates!!!!!

[UKBoB]

Interesting comments re: the 4.2 Red, I cant say im not happy with my 4.5 but the 4.2 does have its advantages. Some may even feel inclined to say its a better engine (for them). Certainly adds more perspective to the 4.2 VS 4.5 debate.

jasonben said:

I set two car alarms off every morning coming up the road right by my works! Even better, is the mailbox underground car park, i can usually guarantee at least 6 to 10 on a good drive around the car park!! Decatted 4.5's with sports boxes are the dogs chocolates!!!!!

I know ! All the alarms Ive set off are at low revs, but volume increases with added revs thats for sure!!

Podie, hows the chim compared to your old S for setting alarms off, beaten your 7 before 7am record yet?